Conclusion

View the most recent version.

The goal of this analysis was two-fold: to present, on the one hand, an overview of the migratory movements in Canada during the last intercensal period and, on the other hand, to look at the socio-demographic characteristics of migrants enumerated in the 2006 Census.

The results reveal that for the previous 35 years at least, Canadians had never been as stationary during an intercensal period as they were between 2001 and 2006.

During this period, only three provinces reported net migratory gains: Alberta, British Columbia and Prince Edward Island. The largest net gains were in Alberta, although lower than in the previous intercensal period. The Edmonton, Calgary, Barrie and Oshawa census metropolitan areas stood out as having high net migratory gains. Most census metropolitan areas posted net losses to other provinces, but remained major poles of convergence within their province.

In addition, the census data helped illustrate the phenomenon of urban expansion. Overall, between 2001 and 2006, within census metropolitan areas, central municipalities reported losses to peripheral municipalities. As well, rural areas located near urban centres owed most of their net gains to exchanges with the census metropolitan areas.

The second part of the article looks the characteristics of the individuals who migrated between 2005 and 2006, based on a multivariate statistical model. It reveals that, as a rule, migrants have specific features that distinguish them from people who did not migrate.

In the first place, the results reveal that a whole range of characteristics associated with the position in the life cycle and the events that are taking place in the lives of the individuals are strongly linked to mobility. For instance, being between 20 and 29 years of age, divorced, separated or widowed, having no children or having a first newborn are all characteristics or events that increase the probability of migration. Aboriginal people and recent immigrants also tend to be more mobile overall, even when taking into consideration the socio-demographic compositions of these populations.

Results also reveal that the association between the characteristics of individuals and whether or not they migrate changes depending on the type of destination considered. For example, while the central municipalities of Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver tend to be favoured by migrants who are single or those without children, the peripheral municipalities of those three cities tend to attract migrants who are 30 years of age or older, married migrants and those living common-law or who are widowed, and migrants who recently had their first newborn.

Visible minority migrants and, to a lesser extent immigrants, are more likely to move to the Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver census metropolitan areas, either in a central municipality or in a more peripheral one.

Furthermore, the probability that a migrant will choose a remote rural area or one of the territories as their destination is relatively high among people aged 45 or over, but much less so among visible minorities.

Finally, migrants with an undergraduate or graduate degree tend to be significantly more attracted to central municipalities in the Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver census metropolitan areas as well as in the other census metropolitan areas.

These variations affect the manner in which the population redistributes itself through internal migrations, and hence the composition of communities.